The event will give the opportunity to the researchers, the University of Amsterdam and Eurecat – Centre Tecnològic de Catalunya, to showcase the results of their analyses, presenting the policy options that can inform future policy-making.

The post Information Integrity & Wikipedia: How community-governed platforms can inform future policy-making. appeared first on European Digital Rights (EDRi).

Why do our digital systems break people? Conversational AI tools like Grok or ChatGPT are promoted as a means to democratize knowledge and expand access to information. In practice, however, they have also made sexual harassment easier, reproduced harmful stereotypes, and, in some cases, encouraged people to self-harm rather than helping them. These outcomes are not rare glitches. They reveal how conversational AI and social media platforms are built, governed, and deployed at scale.

The post Against Technosolutionism: Governing Platforms as Systems of Care appeared first on European Digital Rights (EDRi).

During the State of the Internet, Waag Futurelab takes the annual temperature of the internet. This edition focuses on AI and the limits of our planet. The lecture will be given by Fieke Jansen, co-founder of the Critical Infrastructure Lab.

The post The State of the Internet 2026 with Fieke Jansen appeared first on European Digital Rights (EDRi).

Media scholars Lucie Chateau and Michael Stevenson, and legal scholar Catalina Goanta on how Big Tech killed the internet.

The post Science Cafe: Why the current internet sucks appeared first on European Digital Rights (EDRi).

The Global Gathering brings together groups from around the world working on the most urgent technology-related challenges affecting human rights, social justice, civil society, and journalism at the local, regional and global levels.

The post Global Gathering 2026 appeared first on European Digital Rights (EDRi).

Digital Commons: Infrastructures, Design, and the Ethics of Autonomy is an international conference exploring how digital infrastructures shape contemporary life, and how communities, researchers, and technologists imagine and build alternatives.

The post Conference Digital Commons: Infrastructures, Design, and the Ethics of Autonomy appeared first on European Digital Rights (EDRi).

EDRi has assessed the Digital Omnibus proposals affecting the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the ePrivacy framework. While presented as simplification, the changes amount to deregulation in effect, weakening fundamental rights safeguards, increasing legal uncertainty, and advancing through a process that falls short of democratic lawmaking standards.

The post Reopening GDPR and ePrivacy through the Digital Omnibus: a risky path for EU digital rights appeared first on European Digital Rights (EDRi).

The European Commission’s dangerous and misguided Digital Omnibus proposal includes a dangerous rollback of transparency requirements in the AI Act. 60 civil society organisations, independent public authorities and individuals, including EDRi, urge EU lawmakers to reject a change that would risk weakening enforcement, legal certainty, and the protection of fundamental rights, while offering negligible benefits for companies.

The post AI Omnibus: Reject the proposals to undermine transparency in the AI Act appeared first on European Digital Rights (EDRi).

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

New York, Feb. 10, 2026 — Deportation proceedings against Tufts University student Rümeysa Öztürk have reportedly been terminated. Öztürk’s arrest in March 2025 and her subsequent 45-day imprisonment and removal proceedings arose from her co-authorship of a pro-Palestinian op-ed in a student newspaper.

Freedom of the Press Foundation Chief of Advocacy Seth Stern said:

“We’re thrilled that the effort to deport Rümeysa Öztürk is over, but remain alarmed and disgusted that it ever happened. Öztürk’s case is arguably the most blatant press freedom violation of this century, and maybe the last century as well. The administration did not even bother to present a pretext for its actions — it arrested her, jailed her in horrific conditions, and sought to expel her solely because she expressed views shared by millions of Americans about one of the most important issues of our time. That the government attempted to characterize mere opposition to Israel’s war as ‘terrorism’ is as chilling as any of the administration’s censorial antics. They went after noncitizens first, not because they have any greater appreciation of the First Amendment rights of citizens, but because they’re the low-hanging fruit. They’d throw out all of us who dissent if they could.”

Please contact us if you’d like further comment.

freedom.press/issues/fpf-state…

The Digital Omnibus proposal fails to comply with the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Better Regulation rules, EDRi urged the Council to send the proposal back to the Commission for proper scrutiny and comprehensive assessments.

The post EDRi urged the Council to demand a proper scrutiny of the Digital Omnibus proposal appeared first on European Digital Rights (EDRi).

When it comes to digital rights, the European Union likes to position itself as the leader globally. Ever since the European Union’s data protection regulation, numerous court verdicts that stopped mass surveillance and the charter that established privacy as a fundamental right, the reputation of the European Union as a leader on digital rights has developed over time. Yet at the same time, EU surveillance laws are being expanded quietly – not by way of some big law that grabs headlines but by a growing number of special regulations that give governments access to digital data faster, broader and more often.

Surveillance is increasingly becoming a part of how the EU regulates the digital sphere, shaping laws on national security, online safety, cross-border policing, and digital infrastructure. What we get is a system that recognizes the rights of people, but puts those rights to test in practice. The EU’s highest court has decided more than once that blanket surveillance has no place in the EU.

It was a little more than a decade ago that the European Union’s Data Retention Directive was ruled by the European Court of Justice to be an unlawful interference in private life as it required communication service providers to store all customer data for some period in order to be able to supply this data to state authorities on request. Later, it was also decided by the European Court of Justice that even just communication data like who you contact, when, and from where, can reveal intimate details about people, so that this metadata must also be protected. The court is clear that surveillance has to be targeted, be proportional to what you want to do and you have to have an independent body overseeing it.

What followed was not a step back but a new strategy – which is a part of contemporary European digital lanscape. Older laws required telecoms and platforms to store data systematically; newer directives focus on access rather than collection. Data may no longer be retained by default but it is increasingly reachable through accelerated processes, technical obligations on providers and cross-border requests that bypass older safeguards.

The legal form has changed, while the practical availability of data often has a different shape. To that end, the growing role of private companies is one of the most visible shifts: platforms are becoming gatekeepers of surveillance. EU rules will allow police and prosecutors in one country to request user data directly from service providers based in another; the aim is speed, as investigations should not stall because data sits behind a border. Even though judicial authorisation should remain central, in practice platforms will be the first line of decision-making, required to assess the legality of requests, often within hours and across different legal systems. A second trend reshaping EU surveillance law is prevention: new legislative proposals aim to detect serious harm – such as child abuse material – before it spreads; few dispute the legitimacy of these goals but the challenge lies in the tools required to achieve them.

Detection systems rely on programs that scan traffic, match patterns and watch networks without pause. When governments use them sparingly, the systems still sweep vast stretches of data. Experts and lawyers warn that once the engines start, no simple off switch exists, above all when privacy is required to remain secure.

Europe’s judiciary has consistently opposed generalized monitoring. In matters concerning national security, judges have emphasized that even significant threats do not warrant permanent or indiscriminate surveillance. The conflict is becoming increasingly evident: preventive goals drive the need for continuous oversight, while constitutional principles demand exceptions and restraint.

But courts have made clear that when providers are required to cooperate systematically with public authorities, fundamental rights still apply-regardless of whether the rules are framed as security or infrastructure policy. (e.g., in cases like Privacy International).

As digital governance shifts toward centralised control of networks, the boundary between managing infrastructure and monitoring users becomes harder to define. Formally, the safeguards remain in place. Courts review surveillance measures. Data protection authorities exist. Independent regulators still play a role.

Yet institutional design matters. Recent reforms emphasise coordination, speed, and centralisation. Oversight is increasingly shared between EU bodies, national authorities, and private companies. Responsibility is spread thin.

European judges have consistently emphasized that access to sensitive data must be granted by entities that are both independent and authorized to deny such access. The question remains whether this standard can be maintained as surveillance becomes increasingly integrated into daily digital systems. This does not constitute a clear rejection of privacy or civil liberties.

In theory, EU surveillance legislation continues to adhere to principles of necessity, proportionality, and judicial oversight. The change is more nuanced. Surveillance is no longer perceived as an extraordinary power but rather as a standard aspect of digital governance, embedded within platforms, networks, and international collaboration. For a Union that identifies itself with transparency, individual rights, and an open digital society, the challenge extends beyond mere legal compliance. It involves ensuring that surveillance does not become the default state of online participation. Whether the existing framework achieves that equilibrium, or subtly shifts it, will significantly influence Europe’s digital future more than any individual piece of legislation.

europeanpirates.eu/the-eus-evo…

Executive Summary

The European Pirate Party considers the Commission’s Towards European Open Digital Ecosystems initiative a significant opportunity to strengthen Europe’s technological sovereignty by embedding open-source principles at its foundation. Open source should be regarded as a component of public infrastructure given its contributions to transparency, cybersecurity resilience, and democratic oversight.

To ensure that this objective is effectively implemented, action is required in four priority areas: updating public procurement frameworks to favour open standards; establishing sustainable funding mechanisms for the long-term maintenance and governance of open-source projects; reducing structural reliance on non-EU digital infrastructure; and introducing safeguards to prevent openwashing and undue vendor influence.

In the absence of coordinated EU-level measures, Europe’s developer community may continue to demonstrate strong technical capacity while remaining fragmented, limiting progress toward strategic autonomy and balanced market competition.

Our full submission responds to all five consultation questions, providing evidence-based analysis and specific policy recommendations.

For the complete analysis and supporting recommendations, please refer to the attached document:

090166e5289a7a0dDownload

europeanpirates.eu/european-pi…

Pirate Parties International has increasingly advocated for digital rights in international forums. Our UNHQ representatives presented the importance of digital rights during their 2018 speech at the United Nations Economic and Social Council, and we also published the following statement that year for the Report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.

We emphasize that digital rights are human rights, and global treaties must sanctify those rights and police nation states that both restrict access to digital services and violate privacy. Our digital footprints are more than merely data. They are a part of our person. When we die our digital footprint remains. We must protect our medical records, emails, photos, social profiles, games, and the host of digital records that reflect ourselves in this modern age where a person exists in a digital world that coexists alongside the physical one.

“…you´ll never need to delete another message”

Imagine logging into an old email only to find years of correspondence vanished, or a cherished game erased, or all of your emails, photographs, and files suddenly in danger of being erased if you do not download them from the cloud. Such is the case when service remove free cloud storage that they dangle to attract new users. Remember when Gmail told us that we would never have to erase an email again: “Don’t throw anything away. 1000 megabytes of free storage so you’ll never need to delete another message”.

That amounts to only 1 gb, which they have since expanded to 15 gb for free, but it is still not enough for most people. Furthermore, utilizing free corporate services like Gmail means that you are selling your data to companies and government agencies. We must provide safe and free storage as a human right.

“Social media platforms must ensure that user accounts are preserved.”

Pirate parties have long championed digital rights, privacy, and user sovereignty. It’s time to protect our extracorporeal (beyond body) and posthumous (after death) online existence with a global Digital Legacies Treaty. The core argument of this accord is to protect personal archives. Even if a user is inactive or dead, we must sanctify their digital records. Individuals who are alive must be able to obtain access to their accounts and services. Likewise, next of kin, must have rights to access them. The right to digital services is similar to a child´s need for education but extending over a lifetime and beyond. This act would ensure perpetual access to services and transfer rights, as well as prevent companies from removing access to services that were provided for free (e.g. offering free storage and then changing policy to charge for it). Social media platforms must ensure that user accounts are preserved, unless the user or their next of kin has expressly provided demands to remove them. As social media grows over time, platforms will have distinct incentives to remove the information of users that do not benefit their corporate or political goals. We must ensure that users and user data are not erased in an effort to control the present and our memories of the past.

“Email services and social media platforms must be treated as effective utilities”

To directly tackle corporate arguments that it’s costly to maintain access and preserve user data, a shift in governance regulations is required. Email services and social media platforms must be treated as effective utilities, similar to healthcare and other emergency services. This means that the financial costs required for the services to maintain access to user data would become a government expense, an essential service akin to a military defense budget. In the growing age of AI disinformation, access to an individual´s authentic information is vital towards our survival as a civilization. With this, investments must be made to ensure that only public information remains and an individual´s privacy is respected.

When platforms shutter, data often evaporates. Projects, such as the Internet Archive´s Wayback Machine, UNESCO´s Memory of the World, and the EU´s Europeana archive play a crucial role in preserving our shared digital heritage. Prior global initiatives, such as UNESCO´s Charter on the Preservation of Digital Heritage, are non-binding or lack enforcement mechanisms, resulting in limited scope and uneven implementation. As a result, a large chunk of our collective personal memories are cremated, often while we are still alive. The Digital Legacies Treaty aims to address this with structured procedures. First, it will mandate bailout, takeover, or merger options to keep services alive, prioritizing user data continuity over profit. If that’s impossible, it would require donation of archival data to trusted GLAM institutions (galleries, libraries, archives, and museums). Aside from the ongoing global projects listed above, viable national recipients include the National Diet Library of Japan, the Bibliothèque nationale of France, and the National Archives of the USA. Collaboration between national and global parties will ensure humanity does not experience a digital dark age.

“ National Legacy governance acts will likely precede any successful supranational treaty.”

Finally, we cannot trust that a global Digital Legacies Treaty will be effectively implemented in our lifetimes. National Legacy governance acts will likely precede any successful supranational treaty, and even such reforms may never be sufficient. For the time being, we encourage the public to preserve your own records. Create manual backups on good storage. Remember that even the best hard drives have limited durability. Please consider creating memory disks and other long-term storage. While we often believe that we are living in the modern age, in fact we are at the dawn of the digital age. Our generation is among the first to be able to have digital records that can be preserved forever. We believe that our digital records are important. They are our collective memory preserved for the future. Ultimately, we are responsible for preserving our own memories. And to do so, we must make a global united stand to ensure that our online lives are protected in the same way as our physical ones. We hope that more policymakers, tech leaders, and individuals will join us in this fight. Contact your representatives, share this vision, and demand a web that respects our legacies. Our digital souls depend on it.

————————————————————————————————–

The following message was prepared by members of the PPI Discord community. It does not necessarily reflect the views of all PPI members, but we hope it does. If any of our members have competing ideas about this issue or any other issue that they would like us to broadcast, please share them with us. We are happy to broadcast a variety of ideological opinions and diverse issues. Our goal is to create positive communication to solve problems.

pp-international.net/2026/02/d…

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

Washington, D.C., Feb. 9, 2026 — On Friday, Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF) filed an attorney disciplinary complaint against Gordon Kromberg, the federal prosecutor who reviewed and signed the search warrant application targeting Washington Post reporter Hannah Natanson.

The complaint notes that Kromberg appears to have violated an ethical rule that requires lawyers to reveal relevant legal authority to the court, even if it undermines their arguments. Recently unsealed court records disclose what many suspected: The government failed to alert the court that authorized the warrant to the Privacy Protection Act of 1980, a federal law that, in most cases, forbids the use of search warrants for journalistic work product and documentary materials.

The following statement can be attributed to Seth Stern, chief of advocacy for FPF:

“Kromberg and the government omitted a federal law that should have prohibited the raid of Hannah Natanson’s home when applying for a search warrant. That choice now threatens to expose Natanson’s sources and cripple her ability to report, while also sending a warning shot to journalists and whistleblowers nationwide.

“Disciplinary bodies cannot look the other way and ignore misconduct that threatens the First Amendment, particularly from an administration with a long history of misleading judges and everyone else. When prosecutors abuse their power to facilitate efforts to silence reporting and intimidate news sources, disciplinary authorities must hold them accountable and impose real consequences.”

Read the complaint here.

Please contact us if you would like further comment.

Disciplinary complaint against Gordon D. Kromberg

Open PDF

freedom.press/issues/fpf-compl…

ICYMI

Even though there was no meeting, there’s plenty to update!

Arizona – AZPP’z first party rally is planned for March 1st from 4PM to 6 PM. They will have a table with all the information provided. Speakers are being lined up and anyone interested in speaking should reach out to do so. Light food and drink will be provided. Further, there are plans on coordinating with other organizers and sending invites to other minor parties.

The state of Arizona has moved the deadline for petition signatures up two weeks, meaning the Blase Henry campaign now is two weeks behind schedule. Instead of the previous deadline of April 6th, it is now March 23rd. The signature threshold is high and the challenge is a tough one, but the Blase Henry campaign is committed to collecting the signatures (currently needing less than 60 per day) and being an option come November. If you are in the Tucson area, we are seeking out volunteers to assist with signature collection!

Illinois – Two volunteers recently worked on the Joey Ruzevich campaign, assisting with handing out literature and canvassing. Joey Ruzevich is presently not a candidate endorsed by the national United States Pirate Party, but is a favorite among Illinois Pirates. Ruzevich is currently running in the Democratic Primary for IL-06 in the U.S. Congress.

Nevada – Hunter Rand will be hosting a Meet and Greet event on February 10th at MF International in Sparks. It is an RSVP event with information in the graphics below.

Pennsylvania – Drew Bingaman recently launched his new campaign website, which you can find here. Speaking of the campaign, there will be two (2) Meet and Greet and Petition Signing events on February 19th in Danville and February 21st in Sunbury, respectively. Information regarding those two events can be found on the Drew Bingaman campaign Facebook page.

Pirate National Committee – there are two (2) vacancies on the Pirate National Committee board, following resignations from our PR Director and Webadmin. The role is expected to be filled by the Feb. 22nd meeting. The Feb. 15th has been moved to livestream, meaning the Feb. 15th and 22nd meetings will both be livestreamed to YouTube.

Pirate National Conference – the Pirate National Conference, marking 20 years of the United States Pirate Party, will be held in Boston, MA on June 6th-7th. Saturday June 6th will commemorate twenty years since the party was founded in Athens, GA on June 6th, 2006. You can expect the 6th to feature more festivities and celebrations, while both days will still heavily feature conference business, including but not limited to electing a new board. Speakers, keynote or otherwise, will be announced in the coming weeks. All Pirate candidates will be offered time to speak.

Super Bowl – Congratulations to the Seattle Seahawks on winning Super Bowl LX, but allow us to take a moment to send our love to Bad Bunny for the Pan-American love letter during his Halftime Performance. Juntos somos América. Hell of a show.

uspirates.org/icymi-updates-fr…

The European Pirates concluded their 20th Council Meeting on 31 January 2026 in Ljubljana, Slovenia, focusing on discussion, collaboration, and policy dialogue. The new Board for the European Pirates was also elected during the meeting.

The weekend started with a pre-event by our Slovenian Pirates on 30 January in the form of a panel discussion titled “Chat Control: A Bad Idea That Won’t Go Away”. The topic was discussed by Markéta Gregorová, Member of the European Parliament; Jasmin Feratović, City Councillor of Ljubljana; and Thomas Kranz, Team Leader of the European Pirates Policy Team. The panel was moderated by Mattias Bjärnemalm, Secretary General of the European Pirates.

The Council Meeting took place on 31 January 2026 and was chaired by Marco Confalonieri. The meeting was held in a hybrid format, with online participants attending via Jitsi. It began with the registration of delegations and the Chair’s opening remarks, followed by the approval of the agenda. The meeting lasted five hours.

A total of 26 delegates attended, representing Pirate parties from different European countries.

Decisions During the Meeting

The Ukrainian Pirate Community proposed joining as an observer member, and the proposal received favourable votes.

PP-CAT (Pirates de Catalunya, Spain), one of the founding members, proposed becoming an observer member. The proposal was approved by voting.

A motion to adopt statutory changes in compliance with Luxembourgish law and to streamline the organisation’s operations was proposed. The motion was approved. This proposal had previously been presented at the 19th Council Meeting but did not pass due to insufficient delegates in attendance.

Reports, Discharge, and Elections

Annual reports for 2025, including the annual activity report, financial accounts, and Code of Conduct report, were submitted. The previous Board and the Lay Auditor’s report were formally discharged.

The meeting continued with the adoption of the 2026 work plan and budget.

Following the submission and discharge of reports, elections were held. The 11th European Pirate Party Board was elected. All nominations and voting were conducted via Discourse.

The newly elected Board is as follows:

• Chairperson: Florian Roussel (re-elected)
• Vice Chairperson: Paul Diegel
• Vice Chairperson: Marietta Le
• Treasurer: Alessandro Ciofini (re-elected)
• Board Member: Matěj Bělohoubek
• Board Member: Giuseppe Calandra (re-elected)
• Board Member: Petr Kadlec
• Board Member: Natalie Nanninga-Dorigo
• Board Member: Nathalie Ylitalo

Closing

The 20th Council Meeting concluded after five hours of deliberation, marking an important step in the continued organisational development of the European Pirates. With the approval of statutory updates, the discharge of reports, the election of the 11th Board, and the adoption of key motions, the Council set the course for the organisation’s work in 2026.

The European Pirates extend their appreciation to the Slovenian Pirates for hosting the meeting and to all delegates for their active participation, both in person and online.

europeanpirates.eu/report-on-e…

The European Commission preliminarily found that TikTok was in breach of the Digital Services Act (DSA) due to the addictive design of its platform. EDRi welcomes this decision and urges TikTok to swiftly mitigate the risks to which its users are exposed.

The post EDRi welcomes EU preliminary findings on TikTok’s addictive platform design appeared first on European Digital Rights (EDRi).